Resentful and annoyed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:dumb. it is inequitable. think about it for more than ten seconds.

Every freaking yr, there are complaints mostly by lottery loser prek3/prek4 parents about how the lottery is "unfair" b/c they did not get their snowflake into an "acceptable" free preschool. Boo hoo!

[Anonymous]

This discussion is bizarre to me. The ward 3 schools get no more funding per pupil than any others. The teacher's aren't more qualified or experienced. What has made the ward 3 schools work is SES of the population and the corresponding parental involvement. (Plus PTA donations). There is no magic bullet here- just money and time.

The above comments make it seem like the posters would like to make all elementary schools lottery-wide, providing access to all - but they are forgetting that the same people you are railing against are the people whose very presence makes those schools what they are. Anger against rich people is fine, but those very rich people are directly responsible for high test scores.

[Anonymous]

Yes, but if it is those families that make the schools good, it's equally ridiculous for those families to suggest that everyone move to a small apartment in Ward 3 to get a good education, because the influx of all of those families would, by their sheer presence, bring down the level of the schools that they value so much. So I think the "just move" crowd should think a little harder before encouraging everyone to rent an apartment in Ward 3.

[Anonymous]

Why send our children to school at all? It's not the teachers and it's not the schools. If you are high SES, then your child is going to turn out to be a genious anyway. Whew, that solves my problem of being shut out in the lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why send our children to school at all? It's not the teachers and it's not the schools. If you are high SES, then your child is going to turn out to be a genious anyway. Whew, that solves my problem of being shut out in the lottery.

I think it is kind of true though.
A not-so-great school won't "damage" a high SES child as much as a low SES child, because he/she will receive a lot of the education he/she needs at home. Even if the parents don't even try, they will model "successful" behavior for the child and that will show.

[Anonymous]

Stop complaining, sit down and budget and plan out how you and your family are going to move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, I can't move. My housing costs are $1200 a month for a family of 4. Tell me where in the city I could get somewhere to live for that price and a good school? I have lived here since long before I had children so it was not a consideration when I saw single.

People who throw around "can't you move" have no understanding of the reality of normal people who don't have incomes into six figures.

Another "normal" family here. We were fortunate this year with the lottery - for the first time in three years. We decided that if we failed in this year's lottery, we were going to camp out in the principals' offices of those schools until one of them accepted our child. Be resentful and annoyed but be determined to find a way for your child/ren.

good luck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why send our children to school at all? It's not the teachers and it's not the schools. If you are high SES, then your child is going to turn out to be a genious anyway. Whew, that solves my problem of being shut out in the lottery.

Well home schooling is always an option

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is a 2 BR IB for Eaton:

What? This sounds too good to be true!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This discussion is bizarre to me. The ward 3 schools get no more funding per pupil than any others. The teacher's aren't more qualified or experienced. What has made the ward 3 schools work is SES of the population and the corresponding parental involvement. (Plus PTA donations). There is no magic bullet here- just money and time.

The above comments make it seem like the posters would like to make all elementary schools lottery-wide, providing access to all - but they are forgetting that the same people you are railing against are the people whose very presence makes those schools what they are. Anger against rich people is fine, but those very rich people are directly responsible for high test scores.

Wrong. The teachers are more qualified and experienced. Try sending your kid to my local IB where there has been a different principal every year for the past 4 years (at least) and similar turnover among the staff, where DCPS constantly cut services because they are under enrolled. Without the services it's near impossible to boost the enrollment despite a baby boom in the surrounding area.

[Anonymous]

Not more qualified but perhaps more experienced

[Anonymous]

I agree success is attributable to more than prepared students, but often it is driven by the factors attributable to a high SES community.

Having a qualified and strong principal over an extended period of time is huge. The WOTP communities have that because they (1) participate in the principal selection process, (2) support a strong principal, and (3) there is strong job satisfaction is working at a successful school so I would expect it becomes self sustaining once a good principal is in.

Also, money is not the problem at struggling Title I schools. The skill set to manage the money and use it strategically to support learning is critical and it is my understanding that not all title I schools have that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree success is attributable to more than prepared students, but often it is driven by the factors attributable to a high SES community.

Having a qualified and strong principal over an extended period of time is huge. The WOTP communities have that because they (1) participate in the principal selection process, (2) support a strong principal, and (3) there is strong job satisfaction is working at a successful school so I would expect it becomes self sustaining once a good principal is in.

Also, money is not the problem at struggling Title I schools. The skill set to manage the money and use it strategically to support learning is critical and it is my understanding that not all title I schools have that.

Except for Murch, where the parents eat principals for lunch

[Anonymous]

Nope, the current principal has the support of the parents because he is good at this job. The previous principal was not.

How do I know?

Murch parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope, the current principal has the support of the parents because he is good at this job. The previous principal was not.

How do I know?

Murch parent

Look at the revolving door over the last decade.